The Brush City Council voted Monday to table a decision about whether to update three sections of its city code related to flooding. That decision is one that could have major ramifications for property values and future development in sections of the city.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) recently updated its food plain maps and the flood insurance studies they are based on to include and reflect new flood risk analysis information. The new FEMA flood plain map for Brush designates a floodway covering much of the eastern portion of Brush.

A floodway is an estimated path a flowing waterway (Beaver Creek in Brush's case) would take if it overflowed. Brush has not experienced waterway-related flooding since 1965.

Construction of new buildings and infrastructure is heavily regulated in floodways as any new buildings in the floodway cannot increase the anticipated flooding levels.

Assistant city administrator Karen Schminke told the Brush City Council Tuesday the city council must vote to adopt FEMA's new flood study for Brush into its regulations by April 4 or Brush would come out of compliance with FEMA's regulations for its flood insurance programs.

"Failure of the city to adopt these changes to our text will render Brush residents ineligible for flood insurance, make mortgages nearly impossible to obtain, make the city less eligible for grants and make us ineligible for disaster assistance," she said.

Advertisement

According to Schminke, updating the study is simply a matter of passing an ordinance deleting references to the previous study, from 1981, and replacing those deletions with references to the new study.

However, Realtor Chuck Miller, who lives outside Brush, spoke at the meeting to reiterate his belief that the city should think twice about adopting the regulations because of their apparent limiting impact on renovations and new construction in the eastern portion of Brush as building alterations.

Adopting the regulations would make it against city code to build new buildings or alter existing ones if doing so would raise the anticipating flooding level in the floodway.

Miller said any future construction or development in the designated floodway would require engineering studies and other studies to first be conducted to determine how the construction would impact potential floodwater levels.

"How many people are going to come to Brush and spend an ungodly amount of money to do the engineering study and the other studies that are required to see if they can build," Miller said. "That's the problem."

Miller also expressed concern about the costs to the city in time and expense of making sure the new FEMA regulations are adhered to. He also said that while the city's failure to adopt the study would preclude residents from buying federal flood insurance they could still purchase private flood insurance.

According to Miller, it was also "inaccurate" that failing to adopt the study would make the city ineligible for disaster relief because "its a federal offense for a federal agency to hold funds from a municipality for disaster relief."

"If you chose to table this because you do not have a full council [here tonight] and need to do future study I would admire that because I do not think you have been properly led down this path," he said.

Brush schools superintendent Bill Wilson also expressed concern about the impact the new floodplain regulations, if adopted, would have on the current site of the Brush Middle School property. The district is currently considering options for what to do with the school and property, which is also located in the new FEMA-designated floodplain, after the new Brush middle and high school complex opens.

"I'm asking is it clear in your minds so that we have clarity in our minds does this mean we can knock [the school] down and rebuild or if we knock it down are we done?" Wilson said. "And if we don't have a definite answer on that, that's a question that I would say could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars."

City Attorney Robert "Bo" Chapin said the city could not advise the district on what to do with the school property. However, he said the new regulations did not mean the district could not build something new at the site but that any new structure could not increase the floodwater level.

The four council members present at Monday's meeting ultimately decided it made sense to table the ordinance so that the full council could be present to vote on accepting the new study.

"I would like to be sure we are doing the right thing," Mayor pro-tem Dan Scalise, who was acting as mayor during the meeting because Mayor Rick Bain was not present, said. "We have two sides talking two different things. I am hoping city staff is very confident in what they are saying but I feel uncomfortable making this decision with only half the council."

City Administrator Monty Torres said it would likely be necessary for a special meeting to be scheduled and held for the council to hold an emergency adoption of the ordinance to make sure the ordinance would come into effect by the April 4 deadline.

Article Comments

We reserve the right to remove any comment that violates our ground rules, is spammy, NSFW, defamatory, rude, reckless to the community, etc.

We expect everyone to be respectful of other commenters. It's fine to have differences of opinion, but there's no need to act like a jerk.

Use your own words (don't copy and paste from elsewhere), be honest and don't pretend to be someone (or something) you're not.

Our commenting section is self-policing, so if you see a comment that violates our ground rules, flag it (mouse over to the far right of the commenter's name until you see the flag symbol and click that), then we'll review it.